Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArtsWikipedia:WikiProject ArtsTemplate:WikiProject ArtsWikiProject Arts
Latest comment: 8 months ago19 comments9 people in discussion
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.
For me, the article meets the nomination criteria (technically, 7 days and a few hours from creation to nomination, but close enough). It is well-designed and very well-documented. For an image, I would suggest this Dieckmann erich moebelbau 1931, which has been published very frequently, as it is his book. (On https://imjustcreative.com/erich-dieckmann-metal-tube-chair/2019/12/15, for example) and a new beginning Erich Dieckmann designed furniture that grew organically and wasn't cobbled together—from an elephant's body, a bay leaf, a spider's leg, if you will. (from his quote) (talk) Birkho (talk) 08:20, 6 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Birkho: I'm confused why you have left a review here. Maybe it is different on dewiki, but on enwiki the DYK process only requires a single reviewer, and it's generally best for the reviewer not to be someone who has been a major contributor to the article. I suggest you strike your review (or at least remove the symbol) to avoid confusion. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:44, 6 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Pi.1415926535: Hello, yes, it's different here on dewiki. You can make suggestions and participate in the discussion, and the best introduction and image will be chosen. One question: Why does the image have licensing issues, given that it's available on Wikipedia Commons? Can I help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Birkho (talk • contribs)
Article is new enough (technically 7 days and a few hours from creation to nomination, but close enough) and long enough. It is well-sourced, neutral, copyvio-free, and presentable. A new hook is needed (see WP:HOOK) – the current hook is improperly formatted, does not appear in the article, and is not verified by the given citation. I am also concerned about the image – the source is a non-functional link with no further details, making it impossible to verify that it was actually anonymously published. Either a correct link that verifies the anonymous publication needs to be found, or the image should be removed from this nomination. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:52, 4 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Ariegel: The revised hook is better, but it appears to be a broad summation of the article rather than a specific fact that is included in the article. The claimed source is not used in the article and does not contain any information other than birth/death dates. Additionally, the copyright issue with the image has not been resolved. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:44, 6 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Pi.1415926535: Hello again, here a new proposal: another picture by Erich Dieckmann; or one of his stylish chairs, which is my recommendation, the photo is public domain. Both pictures are shown in the link, hope this helps. * Light club chair 1926 Erich Dieckmann
And here is a new hook (this is the heart of the matter): Did you know that Erich Dieckmann, one of the most productive and innovative furniture designers of the Bauhaus is almost forgotten today?Ariegel (talk) 15:06, 8 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Launchballer: Hi there. I did not use ChatGPT to write the reply or the article, btw I am an expert for the bauhaus movement and don't need AI for this matter:) I did ask ChatGPT if my formating is right, because I messed it up, and Pi.1415926535 did not respond to my call for help but fortunately another experienced Wikipedian (a human) could help me.
@Launchballer: Hi there. I didn't want to interfere with the nomination and wasn't familiar with your rules, but Ariegel asked me for support, since we're both working on this Erich Dieckmann project. You've already read that we take a different approach on dewiki. Now the question: why was Ariegel's post considered vandalism? What do you want to delete, and what happens next? Please clear up any misunderstandings. Which hook and which image will be selected, since this is the issue at hand! I kindly ask for your support, and if I can help, please ping me!Birkho (talk) 09:08, 11 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
The "Wikipedia:Did you know nominations/..." page wasn't vandalism, but was a duplicate (nominations belong at "Template:Did you know nominations/...") and was deleted as housekeeping. I will examine the hooks at a later date.--Launchballer00:33, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I'm available to try to help out with this nom and eventually do a fresh review if all else is now in order (i.e., issues with ChatGPT, image copyright, etc.). -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 15:15, 18 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
Article is new enough (technically 7 days and a few hours from creation to nomination, but close enough) and long enough. It is well-sourced, neutral, copyvio-free, and presentable. A new hook is needed (see WP:HOOK) – the current hook is improperly formatted, does not appear in the article, and is not verified by the given citation. I am also concerned about the image – the source is a non-functional link with no further details, making it impossible to verify that it was actually anonymously published. Either a correct link that verifies the anonymous publication needs to be found, or the image should be removed from this nomination. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:52, 4 October 2025 (UTC)
Requesting a second opinion or new reviewer; I left a note at Wikipedia talk:Did you know. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:46, 8 October 2025 (UTC)
The nominator has not edited since October, and the LLM issues remain unaddressed. Marking this for closure as there appears to be no reasonable path forward for this at this time. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:08, 26 November 2025 (UTC)